Limbaugh's pill use not extraordinary, lawyer says

Miami Herald ^ | Jan. 26, 2004 | DANIEL de VISE

[AlwaysLurking]

Limbaugh's pill use not extraordinary, lawyer says

BY DANIEL de VISE ddevise@herald.com

Rush Limbaugh's attorney mounted an offensive Monday, accusing Palm Beach County prosecutors of smear tactics and likening his client to any ordinary American with chronic pain.

''This nation is full of people who take medication every day and will do so for the rest of their lives,'' said Roy Black, speaking in a news conference in Miami.

Discussing the prescription-drug abuse allegations in unprecedented detail, Black reasoned that the quantity of medicine Limbaugh is accused of ingesting -- 1,800 pills in 210 days -- works out to roughly 8.5 pills a day, ``certainly not an outrageous amount.''

Black questioned the motives of Palm Beach County State Attorney Barry Krischer in releasing details last week of sensitive plea negotiations between Limbaugh and prosecutors.

The December correspondence, unflattering to Limbaugh, shows the radio talk-show host proposing to settle the case through treatment, potentially averting a permanent criminal record. Prosecutors counter: Plead guilty to a single felony charge of ''doctor shopping'' and avoid prison time. Both offers were rejected.

Black said the plea negotiations shouldn't have been released. He portrayed the incident as part of a politically motivated campaign to discredit his client.

Black said the government's plea offer came with a veiled threat: If Limbaugh did not plead guilty, the state would release his confidential medical records.

''The only conclusion that I can draw is that Mr. Limbaugh ... is being singled out more than anyone else for actions that no one else in this community would be subjected to,'' Black said.

Black and other prominent South Florida attorneys said they couldn't recall another case of plea negotiations released to the public.

''There has to be some thought about the long-term consequence'' of routinely releasing such documents, said Robert Jarvis, a law professor at Nova Southeastern University. ``And the long-term consequence in this case is that no one would begin a negotiation about a plea.''

But Michael Edmondson, spokesman for the Palm Beach County state attorney, said prosecutors were confident they'd done the right thing.

Prosecutors consulted the Attorney General's Office and the Florida Bar in response to the Jan. 15 public records request by the Landmark Legal Foundation, which sought all available documents in the case. They concluded the state public records law required releasing the plea dealings, even though doing so violates ethical rules for lawyers.

''The way the Florida public records law works is, anything that is not specifically exempted under the law is permitted,'' Edmondson said. State law trumps any ethical concerns, he said.

But he offered nothing in writing to back up that account. And Limbaugh's legal team produced documents Monday that seemed to contradict it.

Telephone notes from a Florida Bar attorney, paraphrasing Kirscher himself, state that plea negotiations ``are not normally to be revealed [and] so may or may not be [a] public record.''

Attorney General spokeswoman JoAnn Carrin wouldn't say what legal advice her agency gave the chief Palm Beach County prosecutor, citing the ongoing investigation.

Prosecutors began investigating possible prescription-drug abuses by Limbaugh, 53, last year, based on a report from his former maid. Limbaugh has not been charged with any crime.

Limbaugh's attorney accused Edmondson, the state attorney spokesman, of leaking a false story last month that Limbaugh was poised to plead guilty to doctor-shopping. Edmondson denied the assertion.

Doctor-shopping is duping multiple physicians into dispensing excessive prescription medications.

''I can say categorically now that Mr. Limbaugh would not plead guilty to doctor-shopping, and that's because Mr. Limbaugh did not engage in doctor-shopping of any kind,'' Black said.

[an amused spectator]

soliciting a confession in the form of a "guilty" is investigative. confessions are probative.

The crystalline beauty of the truth to be found on Free Republic...

[Cubs Fan]

--Believe it. You've shown us all, based on your comments, that they do sell computers to people even with diminished capacity.--

Hee hee, Diminished capacity? sonds like more liberal projection on your part, lets review the evidence--

You have demonstrated your diminished capacity by not even knowing that when plea bargains aren't agreed to that trials usually take place.

You have revealed your diminished capacity by failing to realize that the elimination of plea bargains would do enormous damage to the legal system.

And you have repeatedly revealed your diminished capacity by going on a conservative site to relentlessly attack one of the most important representives of the conservative cause.

The evidence is clear. You're a moron.

[RS]

I would think you would need a ruling that says that the (non-?) plea bargain info should not have been released before you go after someones ethics in releasing it...
Otherwise the point appears to be moot.
So Blacks next step should be sueing regarding the release, correct ?

[holdonnow]

Late last night you demanded links to these memos I cited. Here they are. Now, this won't change your mind, since your mind is wasted. But for the rest of those reading this, and wanting to be informed about it, here are the documents showing that the SAO fabricated the information he claimed to have received from the Florida Bar, and the Florida Bar's call record showing the facts.

http://www.landmarklegal.org/tickerstory.cfm?webpage_id=568

http://www.landmarklegal.org/tickerstory.cfm?webpage_id=569

[RS]

I'm not sure I follow - you are saying that releasing his own letter is the problem here ?

Does that count even after it was turned down and was no longer "active" ?

I haven't had a chance to locate those statutes you cited yet...More time real late tonight...

[TigersEye]

Limbaugh and Black get the Goods on Brischer

[an amused spectator]

Now, this won't change your mind, since your mind is wasted.

Been on Free Republic for 7 years now, and I've found that nobody on the Web is ever wrong, even if they are. ;-)

To borrow a phrase from the younger set: "That RS guy goes after Limbaugh like it's his job." :-)

[longtermmemmory]

I submit he has three options (and NO it is not moot)

The ethics log does provide grounds to indicate the SA had guidance contrary to the actual action he took. You don't need written ruling first. Had this been a private attorney the Bar would have intiated their own investigation based on the TV publicity alone. (remember they suspended the attorneys soliciting cases after the valujet case within 24 hours for violating the 30 contact ban.)

The CYA letter the AG also supports the fact the SA was acting on their own.

1. File a bar complaint of unethical conduct.
(the advantage of the bar complaint is that medical records can be kept private if they become probative.)
2. As for the liability suit, I don't know if it would be worth it.
3. File a motion to dismiss (if charges are filed) because the release of the letter was so unfairly prejudicial as to demand the sanction.

The next step is to see what happens with the appeals courts. If the SA was smart, (not the case) he would cut his losses now. At this point, they have lost their opportunity to settle the case and still look good.

The SA is screwed. Ethically screwed, publicity screwed, and quagmire screwed.

[longtermmemmory]

no, all three letters would be off limits.

Especially after it was turned down. Otherwise the prosecutor would make absurd offers in order to have them used as PR pressure and intimidation.

Next look would be public corruption. Political gain can be deemed corruption. need to research that. Especially since FL just upped the penalties.

[longtermmemmory]

as an aside, the ethics hotline attorneys are some of the most useful and underappreciated resources for attorneys. They are pretty friendly (sometimes dry), sometimes frustratingly indirect, but most times they will identify the safest ethics path to take.

They are there to help attorneys avoid making bonehead mistakes like releasing these letters.

[an amused spectator]

The SA is screwed. Ethically screwed, publicity screwed, and quagmire screwed.

If it was a "real" felony, it might make a difference. We'll have to see what the SA thinks he can get politically and in terms of revenue enhancement.

It's a pity that the SA didn't try to seize Limbaugh's assets and/or property with some lame WOD excuse. Then it would be plain what's going on in this country:

Couple convicted of slavery lose their property

[colorado tanker]

If a DA pulled a stunt like that in this state, he'd probably be in jail. Also, this plea offer would settle the matter for just about any other first offender.If anyone needed proof that the Palm Beach Democrat machine is on a witch hunt against Rush, this is it.

[js1138]

To borrow a phrase from the younger set: "That RS guy goes after Limbaugh like it's his job." :-)

And mighty proud of himself, he is, too.

[ClintonBeGone]

Otherwise the prosecutor would make absurd offers in order to have them used as PR pressure and intimidation.

What kind of logic is this?Absurd offers? If its absurd in favor of the defendant, i.e., probation in a murder case, the defendant will take such an offer and there is no PR issue. If its absurd in favor of the prosecution, i.e., spending a year listening to holdonnow's show for a traffic violation, the defendant will not take the offer and the prosecution will look silly.

[ClintonBeGone]

It's a pity that the SA didn't try to seize Limbaugh's assets and/or property with some lame WOD excuse. Then it would be plain what's going on in this country:

It always comes back to the WOD, eh?

[longtermmemmory]

that is what the money laundering probe was for. They were looking to see if they could "confiscate" money.

Remember the State of FL not the County will be funding the courts. The SA will also have to disclose how much resources they devoted to this case.

(s)One good thing, this SA is very responsive to mob rule. So next time anybody wants the good'ol SA to hold a lynchn' just crank up the email campaign to finger an enemy of the state.(/s)

[longtermmemmory]

It is simple negotiations.

Ask for the max possible. The defense lawyer is obligated to take this to the defendant. The defendant freaks out.
Settlment plea for less becomes more palitable.

[Cubs Fan]

wow! it couldn't be more clear the SA lied about what the bar said.

Any chance of getting a written copy of what the AG advised?

[holdonnow]

The AG's office did not create a written record. But they did refer the SAO to the Florida Bar, and the Bar's response is the most important. It clearly contradicts what the SAO said, and the SAO's statement was no error. It was a lie intended to mislead, an abuse of office, and a violation of ethics rules.

[an amused spectator]

It always comes back to the WOD, eh?

“There’s a very important message here: If you violate federal law, you stand to lose a lot. It’s going to be more than just a prison sentence,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert J. Rabuck.

Bradley and his companion, Kate O’Dell, were sentenced last week to nearly six years in federal prison for allegedly forcing four Jamaican men to work for Bradley Tree Service against their will.

Rabuck said most federal crimes have forfeiture provisions but, until now, forfeitures have mostly been imposed in drug cases.

“We will forfeit property if it’s forfeitable,” Rabuck said. “That’s a major priority now of the Department of Justice.”

He said the public will begin hearing more and more about asset seizures by the government.

“People who violate federal law will be forfeiting property,” Rabuck said. “It will become routine.”

======================

Tobacco & asbestos were the carefully cultivated excuses for corporate asset seizure.

I think Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert J. Rabuck's attitude tells us where this thing is going...